[Asrg] anti-abuse research statistics examples

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sun, 09 December 2012 16:23 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
X-Original-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: asrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F69C21F893C for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:23:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BpegDpWUJZMj for <asrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:23:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E91F21F8821 for <asrg@irtf.org>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:23:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.9] (adsl-67-127-190-125.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.190.125]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id qB9GNRHD017393 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT) for <asrg@irtf.org>; Sun, 9 Dec 2012 08:23:28 -0800
Message-ID: <50C4BAFC.8040604@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 08:23:24 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sun, 09 Dec 2012 08:23:28 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [Asrg] anti-abuse research statistics examples
X-BeenThere: asrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net, Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg@irtf.org>
List-Id: Anti-Spam Research Group - IRTF <asrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.irtf.org/mail-archive/web/asrg>
List-Post: <mailto:asrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/asrg>, <mailto:asrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 Dec 2012 16:23:30 -0000

Folks,

I'm looking for some example studies that report abuse or anti-abuse 
statistics. That is, a series of examples having statistics in the abuse
realm, with surrounding information to explain the need, benefit and
meaning of the statistics.

The types of studies I'd like to get are:

   1.  Simple study with basic statistics that are obviously useful.

   2.  Somewhat more complex study, with statistics that require some
explanation, but don't require a math degree to comprehend.  (I'm
talking about comprehending the results, not the underlying calculations.)

   3.   Overly complicated study with questionable statistics.

While trend-analysis seems most common, I need some that are more in an 
'experimental' model, such as before/after testing.  This type would use 
t-test, ANOVA or the like.

Any suggestions?  Feel free to just send any that seem plausible; don't
edit.  I'll figure out which ones make the most sense for my suggestion,
as I develop it.

Thanks.

d/
-- 
  Dave Crocker
  Brandenburg InternetWorking
  bbiw.net